Bezos offers a hint of his philanthropic plans

•June 23, 2017 • 3 Comments

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/business/media/jeff-bezos-amazon-rich-charity.html?_r= 0

Jeff Bezos, the founder and chief executive of Amazon, is well on his way to becoming the richest person in the world, with a net worth of more than $80 billion. What’s less certain is what he plans to do with his fortune, and how he could reinvent philanthropy.

On Thursday, after questions from The New York Times about the level of his giving, Mr. Bezos posted on Twitter a “request for ideas” for philanthropy. “I’m thinking about a philanthropy strategy that is the opposite of how I mostly spend my time — working on the long term,” he wrote. “For philanthropy, I find I’m drawn to the other end of the spectrum: the right now.”

Citing a homeless program in Seattle, Amazon’s hometown, that the company is working with, he said he was seeking to to help people “at the intersection of urgent need and lasting impact,” adding, “If you have any ideas, just reply to this tweet…”

The message was classic Bezos — challenging conventional wisdom, seeking the wisdom of the market and highlighting his various businesses. Yet it failed to answer a question that is likely to follow him more often if and when he becomes the richest man: What are his plans to give away some or all of his wealth?

Mr. Bezos, who owns about 17 percent of Amazon, has enjoyed what could be the most rapid personal-wealth surge in history. As Amazon’s share price has more than tripled since 2015, its leader has added more than $50 billion to his net worth, bringing his current total to around $84 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. He is now less than $6 billion shy of taking the title of the world’s richest person from Bill Gates, who has held the crown for 18 of the past 23 years.

Mr. Bezos’ wealth is proof of Amazon’s seemingly unstoppable growth and dominance in a wide range of fields, including online retailing and cloud computing. It adds another Horatio Alger story to the mythmaking machine of American wealth — showcasing someone from the middle class who was adopted by his Cuban-immigrant stepfather, quit his Wall Street job to start selling books online from his garage and created a company now worth nearly a half trillion dollars.

Yet until Thursday, his philanthropy remained largely a mystery.

He is the only one of the top five billionaires in America who has not signed the Giving Pledge, the promise created by Mr. Gates and Warren Buffett for the superrich to give away at least half of their wealth.

He has never appeared on the Philanthropy 50, a list of America’s 50 largest donors, that is published yearly by The Chronicle of Philanthropy. According to public data and news reports, Mr. Bezos and his family have bestowed around $100 million in total on charities — about one-tenth of 1 percent of his fortune.

He has not created a personal foundation for making charitable gifts, according to databases that track nonprofits. Although he sits on the board of the Bezos Family Foundation and his parents, Mike and Jackie Bezos, run it, Mr. Bezos’ name doesn’t appear anywhere on its website.

He and his wife, MacKenzie, did give $15 million in 2015 to Princeton University, their alma mater. The Bezos family — including Jeff and MacKenzie, his parents and his siblings — recently donated $35 million to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. Before that, they made two donations, totaling $30 million, to the center. In 2011, Mr. Bezos donated $10 million dollars to Seattle’s Museum of History and Industry.

And last month, Mr. Bezos gave $1 million to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. His purchase of The Washington Post in 2013 for $250 million was seen by many as a form of philanthropy — using his wealth to support important journalism — but The Post is a for-profit business. He has said that his space exploration company, Blue Origin, aims to save Earth by putting industry in space, but it, too, is a for-profit venture.

Still, Mr. Bezos has never said publicly what he plans to do with his fortune, what causes he might support or even whether he will give away some or most of it.

“The pressure on Bezos to step up is going to grow if he becomes the richest man,” said David Callahan, the founder and editor of Inside Philanthropy, a philanthropy information site. “It’s a little surprising it hasn’t grown already.”

Mr. Bezos declined to comment for this article. His Twitter invitation on Thursday came after repeated questions on Wednesday from The Times about his giving levels and the lack of public information on his philanthropy.

The Twitter post — while offering the most insight so far about his philanthropy thinking — did not commit to any funding levels or to creating a foundation or an L.L.C., as Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook and other billionaires have done.

———-

philanthropy is just a complicated money laundering process..successful businessman are beholden to send the money back to the appropriate venues to continue the current memes of tptb..

“What are his plans to give away some or all of his wealth?”

nobody knows but it will reflect what i noted above..

“He is the only one of the top five billionaires in America who has not signed the Giving Pledge, the promise created by Mr. Gates and Warren Buffett for the superrich to give away at least half of their wealth.”

oic..

“His purchase of The Washington Post in 2013 for $250 million was seen by many as a form of philanthropy — using his wealth to support important journalism

LMAO!

“He has said that his space exploration company, Blue Origin, aims to save Earth by putting industry in space, but it, too, is a for-profit venture.”

hes going to save earth eh?

401

Rosatom plans to sell 49% stake in $22bn Turkish nuclear power plant

•June 23, 2017 • 1 Comment

https://www.rt.com/business/393044-russia-rosatom-akkuyu-npp-turkey/

Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom wants to sell 49 percent of the Akkuyu nuclear power plant (NPP) it is building for Turkey. Russia will retain a controlling stake after the sale.

“Rosatom’s goal is to attract investors by the end of 2017. We want to offer a 49 percent stake in the project to investors,” said Rosatom spokesperson Anastasia Polovinkina.

She added that Russia and Turkey have reached an agreement that electricity generated by the NPP will be distributed mostly by Turkish firm Tetas.

“Most of the electricity will be sold by Tetas and a small part will be sold on the open market,” Polovinkina said.

Last week, Akkuyu Nuclear, the company in charge of the project, received a license to generate electricity for 49 years.

Russia and Turkey agreed to construct the NPP in 2010. It will consist of four reactors with a total capacity of 4,800 MW. Located in the Mersin province on the southern coast of Turkey it is the country’s first nuclear power plant.

President Vladimir Putin has said Russia would invest $22 billion in Akkuyu. The first stage of the NPP is expected to be opened in 2023, according to Ankara.

Once operational, the plant is expected to meet around 6-7 percent of Turkey’s electricity demand. The power plant will have a service life of 60 years and a working lifetime of 8,000 hours per year.

The project has repeatedly been delayed, including being halted after Turkey downed a Russian jet in Syria in 2015. Ties between Moscow and Ankara have improved and work on the plant has resumed.

———–

“Russian State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom wants to sell 49 percent of the Akkuyu nuclear power plant (NPP) it is building for Turkey. Russia will retain a controlling stake after the sale.”

(((who))) will buy it?

“The project has repeatedly been delayed, including being halted after Turkey downed a Russian jet in Syria in 2015. Ties between Moscow and Ankara have improved and work on the plant has resumed.”

leave a guess in the comments..

401

Hawaii may become the first US state to adopt basic income

•June 23, 2017 • 5 Comments

https://www.rt.com/business/392573-hawaii-pass-bill-basic-income/

An unprecedented bill supporting the idea of universal basic income (UBI) has been introduced in the American state of Hawaii.

The bill, titled House Concurrent Resolution 89, was brought by Hawaii State Representative Chris Lee and was passed by both houses of the state legislature in a unanimous vote.

The resolution declares that all the islanders “deserve basic financial security.”

It also orders government offices to weigh the state’s economy and find ways to ensure all families have basic financial security, including an evaluation of different forms of a full or partial universal basic income.

“As innovation and automation and inequality disrupt our economy, we want to make sure that everybody benefits and nobody is left behind. It’s past time that we had a serious talk about not just tweaking our economic policies, but having a new discussion from the ground up about what our values and priorities are,” said Lee as quoted by US online magazine Mother Jones.

According to Lee, the measure is necessary due to Hawaii’s excessive cost of living, which is reportedly the highest in the country, as well as the state’s heavy reliance on low-paid service industry jobs.

———-

“The resolution declares that all the islanders “deserve basic financial security.”

the idea is nice..but who pays..those who work?..if this was fully supported and financed by banks and multinationals then i would agree..

thoughts?

401

Saudi king’s son Mohammed bin Salman is new crown prince..18 Israeli fighter jets deployed prevent coup

•June 23, 2017 • 11 Comments

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-40351578

Saudi Arabia’s king has appointed his son Mohammed bin Salman as crown prince – replacing his nephew, Mohammed bin Nayef, as first in line to the throne.

King Salman’s decree also means Prince Mohammed bin Salman, 31, will become deputy prime minister while continuing as defence minister.

Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, 57, has been removed from his role as head of domestic security, state media say.

He has pledged allegiance to the new crown prince, his younger cousin.

Saudi Arabia has typically been ruled by kings in their 70s or 80s.

Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s rapid ascent is seen by the younger generation as a sign that things are changing.

Before his latest promotion, he was responsible for leading Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen, overseeing the kingdom’s energy policy and economic reform.

He must have already ruffled a lot of feathers in a royal family that was used to being presided over by a succession of elderly men, the BBC’s Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen reports.

His father King Salman is 81 and reportedly not in the best of health, our correspondent adds.

Prince Mohammed bin Salman could, potentially, lead Saudi Arabia for decades, heralding a long period of internal stability.

However, the new crown prince is close to US President Donald Trump, and could ratchet up pressure against Iran – which would raise tensions in the region.

http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13960401000674

18 Israeli fighter jets along with two Gulfstream aircraft landed in Saudi Arabia on Thursday to prevent any hostile or military moves by former Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef bin Abdulaziz who was replaced with Saudi King Salman’s son.

Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz announced on Wednesday his decision to replace Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef bin Abdulaziz with his own son, Mohammed bin Salman.

After the decision was announced, the Israeli air force sent 18 of its fighter jets, including F16I, F15CD and F16CD, along with two Gulfstream aircraft, two tanker airplanes and two C130 planes, special for electronic warfare, to Saudi Arabia at the demand of the new crown prince bin Salman to block his cousin (bin Nayef)’s possible measures.

According to a royal decree, Mohammed bin Salman, 31, was also named deputy prime minister, and shall maintain his post as defense minister, the official Saudi Press Agency (SPA) reported on Wednesday.

Saudi media announced that King Salman has called for a public pledge of allegiance to the new crown prince in the holy city of Mecca on Wednesday night.

The SPA also confirmed that 31 out of 34 members of Saudi Arabia’s succession committee chose Mohammed bin Salman as the crown prince.

Just days ago, the Saudi king stripped Nayef of his powers overseeing criminal investigations and designated a new public prosecution office to function directly under the king’s authority.

In a similar move back in 2015, the Saudi king had appointed his nephew, then deputy crown prince Mohammed bin Nayef as the heir to the throne after removing his own half-brother Prince Muqrin bin Abdulaziz Al Saud from the position.

Under the new decree, King Salman further relieved Mohammed bin Nayef of his duties as the interior minister. He appointed Prince Abdulaziz bin Saud bin Nayef as the new interior minister and Ahmed bin Mohammed Al Salem as deputy interior minister.

———-

“Saudi media announced that King Salman has called for a public pledge of allegiance to the new crown prince in the holy city of Mecca on Wednesday night.”

the new guy is much like the old guy..and they needed help from their so called sworn enemies to make sure there were no..ahh..protests..what were they going do..take them out with anti tank fire??

the house of saud and the israelis have something in common..

“18 Israeli fighter jets along with two Gulfstream aircraft landed in Saudi Arabia on Thursday to prevent any hostile or military moves by former Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef bin Abdulaziz who was replaced with Saudi King Salman’s son.”

401

Lockheed Martin about to close $37bn+ deal for F-35 jets

•June 22, 2017 • 19 Comments

https://www.rt.com/business/393015-lockheed-deal-jets-sale/

US defense contractor Lockheed Martin is in the final stages of negotiating a multibillion-dollar deal to sell a record 440 F-35 fighter jets to a group of 11 countries including the United States; Reuters reports.

The contract will be the biggest yet for the F-35 jets and will consist of three tranches over fiscal years 2018-2020.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airshow-paris-f-idUSKBN1990S8

Lockheed Martin Corp is in the final stages of negotiating a deal worth more than $37 billion to sell a record 440 F-35 fighter jets to a group of 11 nations including the United States, two people familiar with the talks said.

This would be the biggest deal yet for the stealthy F-35 jet, set to make its Paris Airshow debut this week.

The sale represents a major shift in sales practices from annual purchases to more economic multi-year deals that lower the cost of each jet.

The pricing of the jets was still not final, although the average price of the 440 jets was expected to be $85 million, the people said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the negotiations publicly.

The multi-year deal for the fighters will consist of three tranches over fiscal years 2018-2020.

A Lockheed representative said the U.S. company does not discuss negotiations on contracts and said any deal involving a “block buy” would be announced by the U.S. government. A representative for the customers including the United States did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Sunday.

Last week, representatives from 11 F-35 customer nations met in Baltimore, Maryland to discuss terms and toured a Northrop Grumman Corp facility in Maryland that provides equipment for the jet. Those nations included Australia, Denmark, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Turkey, South Korea, Britain and the United States.

———–

imagine if there were no wars..

you cant can you?..and whatever would lockheed martin do if nobody needed to buy fighter jets?

“The pricing of the jets was still not final, although the average price of the 440 jets was expected to be $85 million, the people said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the negotiations publicly.”

weapons of death..

401

The climate hoax tipping point

•June 22, 2017 • 11 Comments

http://theinternationalforecaster.com/topic/international_forecaster_weekly/the_climate_hoax_tipping_point

If the blathering blowhards of the dinosaur media and the Chicken Littles of the Twitterverse are to be believed, the world has officially come to an end. And in a way, maybe it has. Not “the” world, of course, but their world.

That’s because, as you will no doubt have heard by now, Trump just announced that the US will be pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord.

“I am fighting every day for the great people of this country,” Trump boasted in his Rose Garden press conference announcing his decision on the agreement, adopted in Paris in December 2015. “Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord…”

…If only he had stopped there. However, after a brief applause break greeting the announcement of the withdrawal, the Dissembler-in-Chief completed the sentence thusly: “but begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris Accord or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers.” And then, just to make sure he added enough political hogwash to confuse everyone, he pressed on: “So we’re getting out. But we will start to negotiate, and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair. And if we can, that’s great. And if we can’t, that’s fine.”

Ok, then. So the US is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement not because it is the leading edge of the $100 trillion carbon swindle wedge. Not because it is based on the fake science of fundamentally flawed models with fundamentally incorrect inputs. Not because it brings us one step closer to the Edmund Rothschild-articulated vision of a “global conservation bank” to steward over the world economy or the century-old technocratic dream of an energy-based economy where people will be assigned “carbon credits” and forced to ration their activities in response to the dictates of a de facto world government. No, not for these reasons, but because the “deal” wasn’t “fair” for “American workers?” And the Trump Administration is going to immediately begin negotiations to reenter the agreement?

Sigh.

Is this another case of the right decision for the wrong reasons? And if so, should we take this as the closest we’re likely to get to actual victory in the war against the control freaks who are attempting to implement their globalist vision through the climate hoax?

Well, as it turns out there is a bright spot in all of this, after all: The repudiation of the Paris Agreement represents a “tipping point” in the climate debate.

A “tipping point,” of course, is a point of no return, and the concept should be very familiar to aficionados of climate doom-porn. There have been so many so-called “climate tipping points” proclaimed by the fear mongers over the years that I’ve lost track. Thankfully, some intrepid researchers have compiled detailed lists of these dire warnings (all of which, would you believe it, failed to come true).

In 1989, United Nations Environmental Program Director Noel Brown warned us that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

In 2007 Rajendra Pachauri (the disgraced ex-chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) warned that “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late.” Oddly, they went ahead with the Paris Agreement anyway, despite being three years past the earth’s expiry date.

In 2009 Prince Charles of the inbred eugenics-loving Saxe-Coburg-Gotha clan lectured his loyal subjects that there was just 96 months left to save the planet.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown was not so optimistic. He gave the planet only 50 days (and added, lest a skeptical public tempt fate by waiting 51 days to act, that there is “no Plan B!”).

You get the idea. We have been told ad nauseum by the powers-that-shouldn’t-be that unless we accept the latest “Treaty to Save the Planet” then we are all doomed! DOOMED, I tell you!

The Paris Accord was no exception to this rule. We were told time and again that the agreement was essential to avoid the “tipping point” of two degrees Celsius of global average temperature increase over the next hundred years which “scientists predict” would mean “sea level rise, food and water shortage, severe flooding, and drought” and, presumably, dogs and cats marrying.

Never mind that “global average temperature” is an inherently nonsensical concept. Never mind that the thesis that carbon dioxide acts a global thermostat has been falsified. Never mind that climate modeling has been a spectacular, unparalleled failure in the annals of science. We should simply entrust that somehow or others the wise oligarchs of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change not only have the ability to constrain the rise of global average temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius over the next 80 years (to the tenth of a degree, no less!), but that they have the knowledge necessary to do so.

And by “wise oligarchs” I mean, of course, oil companies, bankers, CFR members and other members of the psychopathic ruling class. For make no mistake, they are the ones behind the swindle at every step.

After all, it was Enron and Goldman Sachs who pioneered the emissions trading swindles (that–surprise, surprise!–are a complete and total fraud from top to bottom). It was companies like General Electric, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, Pepsi, Siemens, AIG, BP, ConocoPhillips and GM who spearheaded the Waxman-Markey bill of 2009 by founding the US Climate Action Partnership, which wrote the “Blueprint for Legislative Action.” It was companies like EDF, Engie, Air France, Renault, and BNP Paribas that footed 20% of the bill for the Paris climate summit itself. And it is companies like Exxon and Shell (backed, of course, by the Daughter-in-Chief) who have been the Paris Agreement’s staunchest defenders.

Yes, the world is reaching a tipping point, but it has nothing to do with the trace amounts of life-giving carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Instead, the climate hoax itself is reaching a tipping point, the point at which the public stops listening to the apocalyptic predictions of the “End Is Nigh” crowd.

The evidence of this tipping point is appearing in the unlikeliest of places.

A recent Dilbert cartoon took the climate fear mongers to task for the way they treat their critics. In a company meeting, a client scientist explains to Dilbert and his co-workers that climate scientists feed the data from questionable climate models into “long-term economic models of the sort that have never been right” to determine that human activity is causing catastrophic climate change. When Dilbert asks “What if I don’t trust the economic models?” the scientist turns to Dilbert’s boss and asks “Who hired the science denier?”

The surprising part is not that “Yale Climate Connections” made a clumsy, strawman-laden non-rebuttal rebuttal of the comic strip that in fact went on to demonstrate the very point of the strip itself. The surprising part is that the public so easily saw through the charade; the video has twice as many thumbs down as thumbs up and the comments section is full of people pointing out the video’s flaws. (“The criticism is about models’ alleged inability to predict the future,” as one commenter points out. “The video is talking about how we are confident that the Earth has warmed. It’s a non-response.”)

These types of push-back against the seemingly ubiquitous “settled science” mantra are heartening given the 24/7 assault of climate propaganda that the world has been subjected to for the past two and a half decades. And they are becoming more frequent.

This is heartening, and this is the real victory of Trump’s Paris withdrawal. It is the fact that so many people support the idea of withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. Apparently, people can only take so many failed warnings of doom and gloom before they stop blindly believing what the billionaires for climate change are telling them.

So if you want to end on a positive note, stop reading here.

For the rest of you, you should be aware that Trump’s bold pronouncement is only the beginning of a two year wait before the US can actually begin the process of withdrawing from the agreement itself. And even if Trump does persist and proceed with the withdrawal in November 2019, it still would not undermine the UNFCCC itself which underlies the agreement, and thus would not derail the IPCC or the global governmental climate hoax generally.

Sigh.

———-

excellent article..worth the read..

this:

“In 1989, United Nations Environmental Program Director Noel Brown warned us that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

In 2007 Rajendra Pachauri (the disgraced ex-chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) warned that “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late.” Oddly, they went ahead with the Paris Agreement anyway, despite being three years past the earth’s expiry date.

In 2009 Prince Charles of the inbred eugenics-loving Saxe-Coburg-Gotha clan lectured his loyal subjects that there was just 96 months left to save the planet.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown was not so optimistic. He gave the planet only 50 days (and added, lest a skeptical public tempt fate by waiting 51 days to act, that there is “no Plan B!”).”

the alarmism and scares and doom mongering are boring and always wrong..

“Apparently, people can only take so many failed warnings of doom and gloom before they stop blindly believing what the billionaires for climate change are telling them.”

401

Oil tumbles..closes in a bear market..down more than 20% from 2017 high

•June 22, 2017 • Leave a Comment

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/20/oil-prices-are-tumbling-more-than-2-percent-toward-43-a-barrel-right-now.html

Oil prices sank more than 2 percent on Tuesday, posting a nine-month closing low, on signs of rising production in key parts of the world.

West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures ended Tuesday’s session at $43.23, down 97 cents, the weakest settlement since Sept. 16. The U.S. benchmark fell as low as $42.75, the lowest intraday price since Nov. 14, when the contract hit $42.20 a barrel.

WTI fell more than 20 percent from its 52-week closing and intraday highs, putting the commodity in bear market territory.

Prices for WTI’s August contract, which became the front-month after the settle, fell 92 cents to $43.51. Trading volume was concentrated in the August contract on Tuesday.

Prices took the fresh leg lower on new signs of rising output from Nigeria and Libya, the two OPEC members exempt from a deal to cut production.

Output from the 14-member exporter group ticked higher in May due to rising production in Nigeria, Libya and Iraq, raising concerns about OPEC’s effort to shrink global stockpiles of crude oil. OPEC and other producers have committed to keeping 1.8 million barrels a day off the market through March.

Libya’s oil production rose more than 50,000 barrels per day to 885,000 bpd, a Libyan source told Reuters. Meanwhile, exports of Nigeria’s benchmark Bonny Light crude oil are set to rise by 62,000 barrels per day in August, Reuters reported.

Oil prices are “most definitely” heading to $40 a barrel and will likely dip into the upper $30s, John Kilduff, founding partner at energy hedge fund Again Capital, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday.

The market is turning lower in part on tanker-tracking data showing unsold crude oil cargoes from Nigeria, he said. U.S. production is also a concern because American drillers locked in prices for future delivery, and so they’ll keep pumping even as near-term prices fall, according to Kilduff.

———-

needs watching..

“Oil prices are “most definitely” heading to $40 a barrel and will likely dip into the upper $30s, John Kilduff, founding partner at energy hedge fund Again Capital, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Tuesday.”

back where we were..

401

 
%d bloggers like this: